Barack Obama's Brand(ing) New Day

It took a matter of days, not even months, before the great white hope – Barack Obama, the branding genius who was going to bring us all together – had disillusioned core supporters and antagonized his most fervent ideological opponents.

I tend to look at the world through the lens of branding – that’s what I do, brand development for communities – and for me the Obama brand, in the beginning, represented our “new and improved.” He was opposite to everything we had seen before: his skin colour alone, not unlike the Toyota Prius’s Jetson-like design, represented visible change and something “new.” Yet just like the Prius, Obama has had to conform to industry standards in order to find broader acceptance.

The problem for Obama, or any other idealistic politician, is that today’s media culture entrenches certain brand perceptions. In the old days, people would read a newspaper and hold dinner parties, entertaining a variety of opinions and hearing numerous opposing voices. The opportunity to develop, or even change, your opinion about something or someone was there. But today, in the Age of the Internet – with newspapers being replaced by Facebook and Twitter, where people of opposing viewpoints rarely congregate – that opportunity is dying. We surround ourselves with ourselves, seeking out only those articles and opinions that agree with our world view and ignoring the rest.

I was thinking about the idea of political brands, and our own provincial election, as I was driving down East Hastings Street the other day. While none of our local leaders has Obama’s star power, and none could fairly be put in the same “visionary” category, the idea of branding, how the party wants to be perceived and how they actually are perceived by voters, is no less powerful a metaphor. Politics is a bit like driving: we spend a lot of time looking left and looking right, peering down darkened side streets, but for the most part we just keep going straight. That’s why the party of the “right,” the Liberals, has moved to the left in recent years, embracing elements of the green movement, native rights and democratic reform. And that’s why the part of the “left,” the NDP, is moving right, embracing fiscal conservatism and, against all odds, championing an “axe the tax” cause (against the carbon tax).

Fifteen to 20 years ago, the Liberals and the NDP had very clear right and left mandates: it was “all business” or “all social causes and unions.” In the world of car buying it was no different: you were either a “Ford person” or a “Chevrolet person.” The brands were clear; you didn’t tinker with them. But with Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Corp. now on the verge of bankruptcy, it made me think, Who will be B.C.’s political Prius?

As I continued my drive down East Hastings, evidence of a new political brand – if not a Prius, a smarter, more fuel-efficient model – is emerging. The new Downtown Eastside is the product of a unique melding of two seemingly opposed brands: the province’s governing “right-wing” Liberals working hand in hand with Vancouver’s governing “left-wing” Vision Vancouver, pumping hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars into social housing and shelter (and soon mental health support services). It’s a move traditionally associated with the left. But as I explained recently to area activist Jean Swanson, from the Carnegie Community Action Project, “These social problems are going to be solved in the boardroom, not on the street.”

When it comes to politics, I think I’m one of the most non-partisan voters you’ll ever meet: I’m with the left when it helps my city, and I’m with the right when it helps my city. In life, we are all known for our differences in the end. Yet we all really survive, day to day, on our similarities. It’s an important lesson for any politician – this year, in this new economy, more than ever.